REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT
X x x CITY
BRANCH x x x
X x x,
Plaintiff
Civil
Case No. xxx
-
Versus –
Unlawful Detainer
Xx x, etc.,
Defendants.
x---------------------------------x
A N S W
E R
(In re: Summons, Received on
xxx 2011)
The DEFENDANT xxx, by counsel,
respectfully states:
I.
ANSWER
1.
Paragraphs
1 and 2 of the Complaint are admitted.
2.
Paragraphs
2 to 6 of the Complaint are denied for lack of knowledge or information
sufficient to form a belief as to the veracity or falsity thereof, the
allegations therein being matters known only to, and are within the control
only, of the plaintiff.
3.
Paragraphs
7 to 9 of the Complaint are admitted.
4.
Paragraph
10 of the Complaint is denied for lack of knowledge and information sufficient
to form a belief as to the veracity or falsity of the alleged amounts of
attorney’s fees agreed upon between the
plaintiff and her lawyer. The said paragraph is likewise denied insofar as it
alleges that the defendant has no basis or justification to occupy the subject
property, the truth being those alleged in the special and affirmative defenses
part hereinbelow.
II.
SPECIAL
AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
5.
The
title to and ownership in fee simple over the subject property is in the name
of the Government Service Insurance System (GSIS), its registered owner, and not
the plaintiff. (See Annex “A”, Par. 3, Complaint).
6.
The
plaintiff is not “the owner” in fee simple of the subject property, contrary to her
allegation in Par. 3 of the Complaint.
7.
The
alleged Deed of Conditional Sale between the GSIS and the plaintiff is not annotated on the title on the
property. (See dorsal side of the title of the property, marked as Annex “A”, Par. 3, Complaint).
8.
Although
the GSIS has given the plaintiff the
right of possession of the property under Par.
4 © of the Deed of Conditional Sale (Annex “B”, Par. 4, Complaint), the
plaintiff knew or was supposed to know or
was deemed by law to be obligated to know and to investigate the fact that at
the time of her purchase of the property, the xxx Family were in possession of
the property and that it had a vested,
beneficial and equitable right thereto by reason of Memorandum of Agreement
(MOA) executed in 1975 between its original purchaser xxx, represented by xxx, on
the one hand, and the matriarch of the xxx Family, i.e., xxx, on the other.
A copy of the said MOA is attached as Annex “1”.
A copy of the Special Power of Attorney of xxx
(1974) is attached as Annex “2”
hereof.
9.
Since
1975 up to the present time, the xxx Family has been in possession of the
subject property by reason of the said MOA. This fact was known to plaintiff
when she investigated the background property until the time she closed her
purchase thereof with the GSIS. There is no proof that plaintiff had reported
the real situation of the property to the GSIS for a solution or amicable
settlement between the parties prior to her purchase thereof. Likewise, the
GSIS did not send any investigator to investigate the situation of the property
prior to and at the time of its sale to the plaintiff. It did not issue any
formal notice to the defendant or the xxx Family about the impending attempt of
the plaintiff to purchase the property. Had the xxx Family been notified thereon,
they would have taken urgent steps to acquire the same instead of the
plaintiff.
10.
In 2002,
Sps. xxx, the parents of the herein defendant xxx, executed a Special Power of
Attorney in favor of the herein defendant, a copy of which is marked as Annex “3” hereof.
11. The defendant had answered the demanded
letter, dated xxx 2011, of the plaintiff through a letter, dated xxx 2011, of
defendant’s counsel, a copy of which is attached as Annex “4” hereof. It requested plaintiff’s lawyer for a special
conference to discuss a serious extrajudicial compromise, without admission of
guilt on the part of the defendant. It was not formally answered by the
plaintiff.
12.GSIS is an (if not “the”) indispensable party in the suit being the registered owner in fee simple of the
subject property. The ownership rights of plaintiff under her unannotated Deed of Conditional Sale
with the GSIS are merely inchoate and
contingent. The Complaint shows no Board Resolution from the Board of
Trustees of the GSIS empowering the plaintiff to sue the defendant in behalf of
the GSIS in the instant case.
III.
COMPULSORY
COUNTERCLAIM
13.By reason of the abuse of right committed by the plaintiff and by reason of the instant
precipitate and unfounded suit, the defendant was constrained to hire the
services of a lawyer to defend his rights and interests for a professional fee
of P20,000.00 plus P3,000.00 per court appearance;
14.Similarly, the plaintiff’s unfounded suit has caused the defendant
mental anguish and suffering and public humiliation and embarrassment, for
which the defendant claims moral damages of P100,000.00.
IV.
PRAYER
WHEREFORE, premises
considered, it is respectfully prayed that the parties be given ample time to
reach an amicable settlement before
the xxx City Mediation Center; and that
in case of a failure thereof, and after trial, the complaint be dismissed for lack of merit and the
defendant’s compulsory counterclaim
be granted, i.e.. attorney’s fees of P20,000.00 plus moral damages of
P100,000.00, plus costs of suit.
The defendant respectfully prays for such and other reliefs as may be
deemed just and equitable in the premises.
xxx City, xxx 2011.
LASERNA
CUEVA-MERCADER LAW OFFICES
Counsel for Defendant xxx
Unit 15, Star
Arcade, C.V Starr Avenue
Philamlife
Village, Las Pinas City 1740
MANUEL J.
LASERNA JR.
X x x
VERIFICATION
AND
ANTI-FORUM SHOPPINFG CERTIFICATION
I, xxx, of legal age, married,
Filipino, and with postal address c/o xxx, Barangay xxx, xxx Village, xxx, xxx
City, under oath, depose:
I am the defendant in the foregoing case; that I caused the preparation
of the foregoing Answer; that I have read its contents; and that the same are
true and correct of my own direct, personal knowledge.
Further, pursuant to Rule 7 of the
1997 Rules of Civil Procedure and existing Supreme Court circulars, I hereby
certify that I have not heretofore commenced any other action or proceeding
involving the same issues in the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, or any
other tribunal or agency; that to the best of my knowledge, no such action or
proceeding is pending in the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, or any other
tribunal or agency; and that if I should hereafter learn that other similar or
related actions or proceedings has been filed or is pending before the Supreme
Court, the Court of Appeals, or any other tribunal or agency, I undertake to
report that fact within five (5) days therefrom to this court.
xxx City, xxx 2011.
X
x x
Affiant/Defendant
SSS
Member ID No.
xxx
Issued on xxx 1975
SUBSCRIBED and sworn to before me in xxx
City on xxx 2011, the affiant showing his SSS Member ID Card as stated above as
competent proof of his identity.
NOTARY
PUBLIC
Doc. No. ____
Page No. ____
Book No. ____
Series of 2011
Cc :
Atty. Xxx
Counsel for
Plaintiff
xxx Rm. xxx
xxx Bldg.
Brgy. xxx, xxx
City
Metro Manila
Reg. Rec. No.
Date PO
EXPLANATION
A copy of this pleading is served via
registered mail, instead of via personal service, on the adverse counsel due to
the distance of his law office address and the lack of field staff of
undersigned counsel at this time.
MANUEL
J. LASERNA JR.
